About this Show

Washington Journal

News/Business. Live morning call-in program with government officials, political leaders, and journalists.

NETWORK

DURATION
03:00:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 121 (777 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
704

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Us 26, Washington 23, Nasa 19, America 14, Wisconsin 11, Mars 9, Cheyenne Hopkins 9, Reid Wilson 9, Florida 9, Missouri 8, Mccaskill 8, Virginia 7, Tommy Thompson 6, United States 6, Obama 6, Europe 6, New America 6, New York 6, U.s. 5, Kevin Carey 5,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  CSPAN    Washington Journal    News/Business. Live morning call-in program with  
   government officials, political leaders, and journalists.  

    August 7, 2012
    7:00 - 10:00am EDT  

7:00am
at 8:30 eastern. and we will discuss a trend in higher education, massive open online courses. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] host: good morning, and welcome to "washington journal" this tuesday, august 7, and 2012. the flag at the u.s. capital is at half staff and a mark of respect for the victims of the shootings in wisconsin. in the race for the why house, president obama and mitt romney are campaigning. the democrat in washington and the republican and illinois. nasa is releasing more pictures, including the first color photo of the rover's curiosity expedition to mars. we want to hear what you think about this mission. it costs $2.5 billion.
7:01am
you think it is worth it? here are the numbers to call -- hear of a front-page pictures and the headline from "the washington post" of this morning. reporting from pasadena --
7:02am
looking at a price tag, from cbs. a much-needed boost to nasa, which is debating whether it can afford another mars landing this decade. investing $2.5 billion, it is the priciest gamble yet. let's look at the nasa budget request for 2013. the toll will request is $17 billion and the price tag for the commercial crew and cargo program comes in around $830 million. lots of pictures, images, and stories in the news about this. a triumph for nasa and its engineers as the world watches.
7:03am
picture-perfect landing of a plutonium-powered role for -- rover. you can say nasa's staffers celebrating in "in the your times." and crowds stayed up in times square to watch. people could check it out and see. you can see the excitement of the folks watching in times square. also descriptions and diagrams of what exactly we are talking about as we talk about curiosity. here is "the financial times"
7:04am
breaking down exactly what the rover's dimensions are and what it looks like. you can see the hite, compared to a person. -- you conceding hieght. mariner 4 photos showed a baron and lifeless planet. 1976 -- mars is found to be cold, airless and bombarded with hostile radiation. jumping ahead over 20 years, the pathfinder in 1997, a vehicle on the planet surface observes are rounded pebbles that suggests running water. the odyssey was in 2001, and we saw sririt and opportunity in 2004 where two lenders found evidence of surface and underground water. and phoenix in 2008 found
7:05am
potential antifreeze substances, enabling water to be liquid at low temperatures. what do you think about the nasa missions? do you think they are worth it? is it worth american ingenuity being put to the test? the you feel like it is worth the dollars being spent? there is a debate in the op-ed pages, including "usa today." the view of the editorial staff of "usa today" --
7:06am
it says one of the main benefits of projects like this is to promote a confident america. the counterpoint from the vice- president of the conservative cato institute and author of "the cult of the presidency" writes --
7:07am
7:08am
was nasa apostate mission, $2.5 billion mission to mars, worth it -- was a nasa's mission, $2.5 billion mission to mars, where the? you can see visitors to the smithsonian air and space museum watching a nasa press conference about curiosity. the story says the landing sparked a wave of interest from enthusiasm and casual observers who stopped for updates at the smithsonian air and space museum. is your level of enthusiasm the same as in these men and women and children who went to the
7:09am
smithsonian to follow what was happening there? and have you seen curiosity online? it has its own twitter account. here is "usa today."
7:10am
let's hear what you have to say. our first caller is joe, independent joining us from iowa bank. caller: how are you doing this morning? i don't think it is worth spending all that money. we have a hole in the ozone layer, and we have more -- rockets going to the space station and going to the moon and going to mars. why aren't we up their fixing but ozone layer? all of these billionaires' throwing all of this money behind mitt romney, what are they spending it on something useful and fix the damage we
7:11am
have done to this earth instead of just ignoring it like it doesn't exist to play around here and there, whereas in the meantime we have a serious problem in the middle of this country. host: so you think more money needs to be spent on issues like the drought? caller: absolutely. people are suffering. it is hurting the whole economy and everything else. we go on these little adventures and we don't take care of the things we need to take care of. host: let's look at a tweet coming in. thomas, democratic caller and kansas joining us now. hi, thomas. good morning. are you with us? looks like we don't have that the caller. looking at more stories about curiosity and how americans are looking at it and how the international community is looking at it as well. here is the headline "the
7:12am
washington times." you can see here one of the first images beamed back to earth. it is of the sun setting on mars. it was sent shortly after rover made it successful landing. larger color images are expected next week. we have seen our first one so far. charles, republican from arizona. hi, charles. caller: how are you? host: good, thanks. caller: to give to your question about what i thought it was worth it, i do think it is worth it. to answer the ages-old question of whether we are alone in the universe, how can you put a price tag on of the like that? to go further -- i am further what -- 41 and never thought it would be possible to know that answer to that question in my lifetime.
7:13am
and it is quite possible i will now. to me, i think it is worth it. host: and using this mission may get closer to that answer? caller: absolutely. absolutely. i am 100% -- and i think a lot of my friends are as well. host: charleston, west virginia. chuck, democrats' line. caller: how are you? i am extremely excited about it. i woke up in the middle of the night to watch the landing. to be honest, i was really worried about it, because it is a very complicated procedure and i was thinking more that it was going to crash, but when it came off successfully i was extremely excited. i am 53 years old. i have been following the space program for virtually all of my life. it is an extreme -- i am an extremely strong supporter.
7:14am
an independent caller said it should be voluntarily funded. if it was up to me, i would have a problem with that. for instance, on my tax return, if i could contribute $50 to nasa for my tax return, i would have no problem doing that whatsoever because look at the cost of this mission, the cost of the curiosity mission. it cost $7 per taxpayer total. and you could spend that much money in the afternoon at a movie theater. so, i think it was money well spent. host: thank you for your call. let's look at "the baltimore sun" reporting on the rover landing which the headline says hit the jackpot.
7:15am
our next caller is joining us by michigan. steve, democrat. caller: how are you doing? can you hear me? i think it is kind of a waste of time and money. we have people who are going hungry in this country. you know, i just think that we have better things to be
7:16am
spending our money on. explore our't even oceans to the death that we have -- depth that we have. we need to concentrate on taking care of the people in this country. if we don't have a strong america, we don't have nothing. we are the only shining light in the world as far as i am concerned. host: what do you think about "usa today" editorial that says this shows american power, american scientific accomplishments, and as it says, it promotes a confident america? caller: i guess if you can afford that, that is one thing. but right now i think we have to many problems. to many people out of work. i think we could work on this planet and figure out those problems before we start heading to mars and the building -- you know, spending money on
7:17am
something out there that could be. but we've got problems here on earth right now and i think the taxpayer dollars would be better spent taking care of the people in this country. we have another michigan caller. david. good morning. caller: i would like to say it is more chaos -- pay attention to the left hand and not with the right hand is doing. i could go on on why we can't afford it. but, oh, well, here we go. what is the next trip going to cause? host: is there a price tag you would be ok? pardon me, baby -- wrong name. -- pardon me, david. caller: not really -- to put a
7:18am
few men on mars, how much will that take? just go, go. but the last caller, we have more problems helm. -- at home. [video clip] >> for a long time goes on the project needed -- to get through big events. but we built this grover not just to be launched and to land on mars but to actually drive on the bars and execute a beautiful mission. we have ended one phase of the mission, much to our enjoyment and to the joy of a lot of folks here in the audience and on our own team. but another part has just begun. and really, it is the fundamental reason we build the rover, the purpose we build the rover. we are distorting the mission.
7:19am
host: michael watkins talking about the landing and what is to come. joining us from virginia, alex. caller: good morning. i am a big fan of this project. i think it is an inspiration. i think this is exactly what america needs. and as much as it focuses our attention above the common phrase -- politically -- particularly in the political season right now. admittedly a number of callers pointing out across the world there are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed, with food it shortages and the drought we are experiencing, but just this idea that we could collectively come together, the brightest minds in one room, and go to mars and take a picture we can all look at is just phenomenal. host: did you stay up to watch a landing? caller: admittedly, i did not. i was actually not very familiar
7:20am
with this project until things started getting published out there. and i think that maybe even made it sweeter to me. while i go about my day to day life, i get to wake up and see a picture from mars. as if it is commonplace. it is just wonderful -- i think it is great. a very impressive. regarding the price tag, i am originally from boulder, colorado, and the science technology government programs they're definitely built the city in a lot of ways. so, to see this used. what i appreciate about it is this information is not proprietary. if ibm does this, and the dragon x does this, the world may not know. i like the fact there is going to be technology that spins off of this and there will be opportunities for university to do research as -- universities
7:21am
to do research. host: jim tweets in -- here is an email coming from florida by bob -- pittsburg, massachusetts. sam, independent. good morning. what do you think of a mars mission? caller: i am kind of wondering why we would go there to begin with. not that we will ever be good to live there. in my lifetime -- i am 53 years old. i can for the life of me why we would spend this kind of money when the really we could do a lot more on this earth, which is really what we need to take care of.
7:22am
but what i am thinking -- perhaps there is somebody up there and they happen to be -- it just does not make any sense to go up. take care of the country. this is a disaster going on everywhere. what would really be a phenomenal thing to do, maybe they should put chips on all the pedophiles in this country so we can track them with all of this technology. we would probably be a lot better off that way. host: i've mentioned curiosity has its own twitter account. here is the headline of "usa today -- one of the photos curiosity tweeted out.
7:23am
wichita, kansas. thomas joins us on the democrats' line. caller: geronimo -- we got to go? that is just too funny. was -- it was a great project. the guy from virginia was not really paying attention to it -- and i did not know anything about it until the seven minutes from hell or what ever was on the news. a great video. what impressed me was we heard there was news there were not that many engineers being produced in the united states, but look at that engineering feat, for one thing. the other thing that impressed me was that, i only saw one woman in that room. come on, you women, go out and
7:24am
get those engineering degrees. that is what really impressed me. and since everybody else has been going just a little of , i'd like to know if governor romney -- i'd like to see his birth certificate. do you know what i mean? and his tax returns. host: ok -- we are talking about a mars mission and what you think about it, the $2.5 billion price tag. the last caller mentioned the seven minutes of terror. that's what the folks at nasa were describing. it turned into hours of celebratory high fives and cheers as the robotic explorer wades through martian atmosphere
7:25am
before gently coming to rest. seven minutes was how long it was going to take, wondering if it would land as planned, as hoped for. you can also see some footage. a couple of women in the crowd of employees at the jet propulsion laboratory celebrating their success. massachusetts. sandra droid says. caller: i would like to know, where are we going to go from this? first, nascar -- they turned around and that the bill through and a bill through for the wine co. and tuna. now we are going to mars to explore the unknown. and what is next? what are they going to do with our money next? blowing all of our money and yet not taking care of america. shame on them. host: here is an op-ed on "the baltimore sun."
7:26am
it goes on to talk about science and math and how a democratic -- demonstrates america's ability.
7:27am
monticello, new york. eric is an independent caller. caller: i would just like to say that i think the big question here is to lose money is it? it is all of our money. we all paid a large amount of money through taxes. who gets to decide how the money is being spent? this is a lot of money. and it is nothing new. it has been going on for a long time. money being spent, not knowing where it can get spent. we have people losing homes, people starving, we have diseases, we have so many other things we can spend money on. does mars matter right now? does it?
7:28am
to me it really doesn't. it that is all. i just wanted you my opinion. i think we should be able to vote where the money goes. this is not five or $10. host: this is a tweet that echoes some of the same sentiment. that is a bit of a sarcastic ending with the tea party hash tag. ruth, republican. caller: i am certainly in favor of the project. when you think about -- 400 of these trips to mars, $1 trillion and we are overspending on other things. at our deficit is over $1 trillion. over $2 trillion a year. host: are you still with us?
7:29am
caller: i just wanted to point out that we are spending hand over fist, $2 trillion more every year than we take in. and when we think about the nasa thing, the landing was just 2.5 -- we could make 400 landings 4 $1 trillion. so, this is cheap, in a way. host: here is a tweet coming in -- there is an e-mail sent to us.
7:30am
let's look at comments that president obama made in response to the landing. this is after words. it says that -- prescott valley, arizona. adam, democrats' line. caller: good morning. that statement by the president and the last couple of tweets
7:31am
kind of lead into what i was going to say. i grew up next to nasa research in san francisco bay area in california, and i have a lot of friends and i have known a lot of people who go on to stanford, go to the nasa project. when i was a child, we used to go on field trips to the nasa center. and it was really just -- it makes me think of europe. people over there, when the sailors were coming over here for the first time, they were probably wondering -- well, europe is our home, we will all warwick -- always be there. maybe someday there would be something like columbus day for our columnists on mars. -- colonists on mars. there will always be homeless
7:32am
people and people in trouble, but we have to figure out what our science is going first today. we have to figure out and put it to the test. of course, we could divert our money to a bunch of different other ways, but for what it costs, i think it is worth it. it helps our scientist developed the technology we need in the future. -- it helps our scientists develop the technology we need in the future. edward is a democratic camera outside of washington, in greenbelt, maryland. caller: i am a retired scientist at goddard -- there would be an enormous spinoff and would be very much worth it because such spinoffs have always boost the confidence of the united states and science
7:33am
and it is very much needed. the fact of the nation's in front of us -- seemed to be at a bus. -- seemed to be ahead of us. i can assure you this will pay off. i am also a christian who happens to be a scientist, and what this mission -- i can predict do you that this mission will discover there is not a shred of evidence there is life at all on the planet mars. we will never discovered this as the -- molecule has demonstrated to us, we can't even begin to understand how to create life. life has never been created in a test tube and never will be, not by us. but this will be a spinoff in two-ways -- it will boost confidence in the scientist and
7:34am
boost our faith in god. and you can mark my words for that. being a retired scientist at nasa's goddard space center -- ph.d. scientists retired. host: here are some comments on facebook -- you can join the conversation by looking for c-span on facebook.
7:35am
west virginia. janet, republican caller. how are you doing? caller: i am fine, thank you. i just bring it is a drop in the bucket, the money wasted. trillions of dollars, we don't know where it went. i think it should have some itemized something to show us where all of the money went. and i think that taking away from the service, our armies and navies and what have you, breaking down and our army, we are just been brought to our knees by this administration. someone needs to check them out and see where all of this money has gone. more than all the presidents have spent. then i just think it is terrible what is going on. host: it sounds like you do like spending money on this project. caller: i think that is like a drop in the bucket with what has been lost what solyndra and all
7:36am
of these things and sending money overseas to drill for oil in one as well. why aren't we drilling for oil year and giving it to a lot of other countries -- the money, it doesn't make sense to me. i just don't understand this administration. host: and immelt coming to us from alan -- stella on twitter -- abc has a story called "made in america." "the rover reaches the red planet."
7:37am
columbia, maryland. allen, independent gammer. caller: i am very impressed with the success of the nasa mission. i don't think it is a waste of
7:38am
money at all. actually, it's the best way our government can spend money. because of technologies, it brings real value into existence that didn't exist before. i am a little dismayed that people don't see that. in fact, to prove the point, you could say that expenditures to nasa could be off the balance sheet. in other words, they don't need to have a revenue source -- you could create many new and spend it into the economy because that's how you are going to pay for the pri -- paychecks of a growing population. you need an expanding currency for an expanding work force. maybe this will make sense to some of your other callers. host: here is another allen, a democrat from sanford, florida.
7:39am
caller: can you hear me ok? living in florida, it brings a lot of jobs to my state to begin with. i just think it is really inspiring. the fact there might of the life on mars, even if it is just bacteria -- it would be great to find out. i have heard stories about how when the moon landing happen, how transform it said that was. with all the stuff that was going on -- vietnam and race relations and things like that. it was great we could come together. i think this is a similar thing. as far as wasting money -- i agree we need to spend more money on homeless and the economy and things like that, but the stuff we spend money on -- you have a program over on book tv that talk about the drones. not that we don't need those, but it has become big business and the government spends a lot of money on that. bridges to know where. i heard alaska is the biggest
7:40am
recipient of federal funding. i did research for a paper several years ago. alaska, a real conservative state, is the biggest recipient of federal funding. and they give people a check just for being a resident in the state, which is of the money they get from the oil drilling. if you want to talk about where money is wasted, i feel that that is where we need to know. host: let's look at a couple of other stores in the news. the wisconsin newspapers, including "the wisconsin state journal" reporting on the shooting sunday. a portrait of the gunman becomes clearer and it shows the sikh community and is says -- "sikh determined to carry on." members of the temple listen to an fbi special agent in charge during a news conference. in oak creek, wisconsin.
7:41am
the gunman killed six people at the temple sunday before being shot and killed by police. here is another wisconsin paper. "the leader telegram." a darla profile revealed -- is the headline. -- "a dark profile revealed a." "usa today" looks at hate groups across the united states. silence has got to stop" is the headline.
7:42am
you can see the concentrations and geography in the map of the united states. in other stories -- looking at politics and campaign 2012 race for the why house. in a twist on an agenda, a tax plan is named. this is "the new york times." mitt romney, let's look at what he is up to. shopping outside of -- in new hampshire. on a day off the trail, parents and small talk. mr. romney had no public events scheduled but it did not mean he was idled. he made runs to a hardware store, gross restore and
7:43am
pharmacy about a mile from his lakeside home -- grocery store and pharmacy. a spotlight on three women -- republicans plan to spotlight three high-profile win -- women as headliners in the convention later this month in tampa, florida. governor nikki haley of south carolina, also the governor of new mexico and former secretary of state condoleezza rise wall have prominent speaking roles. we will talk more politics in a moment with reid wilson from " hotline." but more on you about the mars mission. charlie, republican. caller: i was just wondering about all of these people complaining about these prices and everything. i wonder what people 531 years ago standing on the docks in spain watching columbus lead
7:44am
with three little ships and eventually finding the united states -- even with three little ships and the mentally finding the united states, i wonder what would have happened had he not made the voyage and what the results would have been 5 budget in 31 years later if america still had not been discovered? who knows what we will find it on mars? knows what we will discover a thousand years from now when we go much further? host: you are a republican? we have had republicans and democrats and itts voice in both like and dislike for the program -- independents voice in both like and dislike for the program. but not seem like as a partisan issue. caller: i don't think it is political in any way. it just has more to do with how much people see the future and how much people are concerned only about their own little thing today and next week.
7:45am
i just think it is very, very interesting as to what might be 1000 years from now. obviously we will never know, but it is just interesting to kind of contemplate it sometimes. host: "the wall street journal" has this op-ed title "one giant leap for curiosity." texas, richard, independent. caller: good morning. host: what do you have to say to us? caller: there were a lot of callers talking about the jobs and unemployment and money can be spent on it. but we are at a point in time unemployment rate is down further than it has been -- we are in the midst of a political battle, a bunch of civil battles. this union that we live in is not coherent. when we go back to the 1960's,
7:46am
the moon landing. once we landed, what apollo landed on the moon, it was a time of unity for america and i think that is what curiosity is doing. there is not a single person who can't view the pictures of mars, the sun setting, and does not see the wonder of the science of landing on mars. host: do you need to see any results, do you need to see something substantive learned from this in your lifetime? caller: i think the end result is simply getting there. if we are looking for more, then we are never going to get that. constantly searching and looking for more. i am 22 years old. the lot can happen in my lifetime with nasa. it has already come this far. the fact we are their viewing and searching and actually taking time to do this is a great and result for now. host: we have a tweet coming in from irving.
7:47am
one last facebook message -- jason says -- thanks for all your calls, tweets, facebook, and an e-mail s. coming up next on "washington journal," banks who still owe money to the tarp program, with cheyenne hopkins from bloomberg and the later on, reid wilson will join us to discuss the 2012 battle for the senate. we will be right back. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> tonight starting at 8:00 eastern on c-span2, we will take you inside the presidential
7:48am
campaign process. first with fred davis, an adviser for the mccain 2008 campaign as he talked about his experiences and compared them to this year's campaign. >> if i am advising mitt, who is not going to win because of excitement -- let's work it that way -- i would look to someone who did bring some excitement. sarah palin brought excitement to john mccain. chris christie would bring excitement to mitt romney. i doubt that happens. >> after that, daniel g. discusses the use of social media and demographic data. >> the obama campaign in 2008 generated over 200 pieces -- 200 million pieces of inflammation on the electorate going door-to- door and all of it is housed in the database and becomes the foundation from which to the campaign can then go back and coordinate the online outreach programs for 2012. >> at two different perspectives
7:49am
on campaigns, all starting tonight at 8:00 eastern on c- span2. >> sunday, look for our q&a interview with andrew ngorski, his new release "hitlerland." i had no idea of the experiences of my predecessors, correspondence and diplomats and berlin. despite all the time i spent in germany, i had not spent a lot of time thinking about what would it have been like to be a correspondent there in the 1920's and 1930's and how would you have operated, what would you have noticed -- noticed not noticed and much less how would you have acted. >> sunday at 8:00 on q&a. "washington journal" continues. host: cheyenne hopkins is treasury reporter for bloomberg. good morning. at the tarp program is almost four years old right now. some banks have not given back
7:50am
the money, have not essentially paid back. why not? guest: there originally was also not a provision to pay back the money. it had got nystagmus so a lot of banks wanted to pay it back. but most of the healthy banks are out now and treasury acknowledged those who are left, most will not be able to pay it back. so instead of just the bank paying back, reverting to doing auctions and the market and then a bentley in the pot -- in of all my bundle some of the money togher and sell in the market. host: looks like a lot has to do with size. banks were the $10 billion or more a piece have largely paid back the money. can you name some of the major banks? guest: jpl morgan, citibank -- j.p. morgan, citibank, goldman sachs paid back tarp. initially, $125 billion was given to the largest banks and
7:51am
it quickly paid back. host: and banks worth less than $10 billion a piece, and moneys outstanding versus what they paid back. what is it about the smaller banks giving them a harder time? guest: a lot of the smaller banks are not as healthy as the big banks. they also don't have easy access to the capital market, so it is harder for them to go out and raise capital to pay it back. host: here is a piece that you wrote for bloomberg a couple of weeks ago. the u.s. treasury department said it started selling stakes today -- first of all, why get out of it? why is of the treasury department trying to extricate itself from these banks? guest: hutras reece says it was never intended to be a lifelong shareholder of banks, so it was natural they would eventually get out.
7:52am
i think they are realistic probably will not do with this year. and probably will continue into next year. host: why is it so? and how is it planning out, as it begins at these auctions of preferred stock and debt position -- who is buying it and how is it going? guest: it is not as transparent as to who is buying it but it is going well. not exactly getting dollar for dollar, but with interest payments and warrants they aren't getting profits. the bank program, unlike some of the other programs, even a -- even though it is unpopular it is actually making a profit. host: if you would like to talk to cheyenne hopkins from bloomberg, hear the numbers to call -- we are talking about banks and that is still owned -- all money to the top of program and how the u.s. government is dealing with that. .ere is a chart we savee
7:53am
total allocation, how much return, and also the revenue side. tell us about revenue. guest: the banks have to pay warrant on the tarp, and i had to pay at an interest of 5%. after holding the top for five years, it goes up to 9%. so there is a huge incentives for the bank to get out of that after five years. and the also have to pay principal. a lot of those extra payments -- profits coming out of. host: we also see this. the state of the bailout. you can see the money that went out for tarp or send the money that went out in other ways. the banks and other financial institution bailout vs fannie mae and freddie mac, how much money went out there, the auto companies and to aig and the talks at asset purchases. cheyenne hopkins, you start off by saying there was really a
7:54am
game plan. why wasn't there a big picture ibm of how to wind things down -- big picture idea of how to wind down? guest: the original plan was only three pages. that was rejected. then they gave a more substantive -- but there was never a provision to force the banks to get out of its. maybe the government never envisioned the banks would be in a long term and they would need to force them out. host: how expected or unexpected as the start -- as this turn of events then, the smaller banks having trouble to buy back? was it unexpected? guest: i think it was always expected for smaller banks to have more trouble paying it back. they just don't have the access to raise money as easily as the large banks do. and a lot of them were heard a lot more in the local markets.
7:55am
when the economy goes down vote local banks are hurt more. host: from "the wall street journal" -- you can see the numbers from the inspector general of the troubled asset relief program. we can see how these banks are missing their payments. are they concentrated on wall street? guest: no, what is left is mostly community banks. i think the largest bank left navy has 700 million or $900 million left and the larger banks are largely out. after event misses some in the dividend payments, the treasury can replace executives. they have enforcement tools they can use to replace someone on the board. host: well the treasury department still have leverage once they sell things off? do they still have the influence
7:56am
over the bank and their ability to make changes or recommendations? caller: not as much, but the banks are regulated. all the major banks are regulated by the pettitte reserve, the office of comptroller of the currency. -- by the federal reserve and office of the comptroller of the currency. host: a story we are looking at. one reporter recently in "the wall street journal." hundreds of smaller banks cannot afford to pay -- repay federal bailout loans. let's get to the phones and hear some calls. we are talking to cheyenne hopkins from bloomberg. from florida, nelson on the republicans line. caller: good morning, how are you? this is nelson from cape coral. it is no surprise to americans that larger banks have become bigger and smaller ones were having trouble. but i would like to point out that senator jeff merkley from
7:57am
oregon will be meeting with tim geithner and basically he will be bringing to the table bo nds to sell to the public to deal with the financial housing market, which has caused the mess in the banks. some people may know that i am a proponent for america having the first public bond bank. but basically his plan will be for the 8 million people that are underwater -- it does not go far enough. there is a solution to be able to use a better system that as for the people and by the people, separating it from the river does market and allowing people to acquire more wealth. -- from the derivatives market and allowing people to acquire more wealth. it is a matter of time. maybe people came together to really be heard, to live a real solution to the problem.
7:58am
guest: the refinance program for on the one of borrowers has been a big focus for this administration. previously the focus was on modification of loans but now they are trying to do a lot more focus on underwater loans. there are a few bills in the senate -- some may get a vote but they do not have a lot of similar bills in the house, so i don't know if much would go further this year. but maybe next year. the administration is trying through gmc's and fha to do their own programs. host: peter, welcome. caller: i have heard various things about chrysler's repayment of tarp -- the tenor of what i heard is the corporation has been restructured. i would like to hear anything you would have to say or give
7:59am
details on chrysler's repayment of tarp. guest: the of those has been another focus. it has not worked as easy or not a smooth as some of the large banks, but the government has been pretty active in getting the of those out. they are not there yet and have not indicated a time line as to when it what happened. host: tony is a democrat from winston-salem, north carolina. hi, tony. you are on the program. caller: thank you. host: what do you have to say for us? caller: it is just awful. you never heard anything like this back in my day. 1980's -- banks and the state right now. -- in this state right now. i don't trust nobody. you know what i'm saying? it is really just a sign of the times. everybody is just doing their
8:00am
own thing. host: view trust banks less than you did say five years ago? -- do you trust banks less than you did, say, five years ago? caller: i will be 46 in august. been there and done been there d done that. i'm keeping my money in my pocket, thanks. guest: four years after the crisis, there is still a lot of mistrust in banks, and you see that in the tenor of congress, in the election, occupy wall street, if still debating dodd- frank changes, there is this feeling of distrust. there was the scandal in the with j.p. morgan london of whale, libor scandal. the treasury secretary has said, yes, there is still work the banks need to do, but they are
8:01am
better capitalized to handle a crisis that. >host: the caller expressed concern about the banks. when people look at the t.a.r.p. payments, the banks that have outstanding money for the small banks, as we have talked about. has the t.a.r.p. program and the banking crisis affected people's opinions about small banks in the white has with the large banks, the ones that you associate with wall street? guest: unfortunately, they get lumped into that category. what is left are the community banks. when people talk about t.a.r.p., they still think wall street bailout. i know community banks have tried to differentiate to say, the independent community bankers of america said that they did not cause a crisis, they were in small communities
8:02am
that got wrapped up in it, but now they are suffering because they are in an economy and cannot afford to pay this back right now. host: the red signifies the most payments missed. you can see them scattered throughout the country. guest: a lot of it is in areas where there is a poorer economy. those banks are suffering from the local economy and having trouble accessing capital. host: next phone call. east brunswick, new jersey. caller: my question is why the united states government borrows money from the federal reserve, when in the constitution it says they have the authority to coin money and regulate money thereof?
8:03am
guest: the federal reserve has taken a lot of the criticism post-crisis. your concern is shared by a lot of republican members who are angry at the federal reserve. there are some bills on the hill to change the federal reserve. even though it did not make it in dodd-frank, it is still brought up in hearings. host: here is a question on twitter. did t.a.r.p. work? guest: that depends on your viewpoint. certainly, it provided stability to the economy. i guess it depends on where you are today, if you feel like the economy is stable banks did not immediately start lending from it, but data shows that they are
8:04am
storm to pick up. but i think both paulson and tim geithner would say that the economy is coming back. it is hard to explain that you're mulliken's -- two republicans on the hill, who want tangible evidence. host: here is a look at banks who are having trouble paying back this money. you can see in green the money repaid. about half, in orange, is money outstanding. democratic caller in pennsylvania. caller: morning. i would like to remind the young lady there, the republicans on the hill, they are the problem. the big banks run them. they are the ones that got
8:05am
goldman sachs and all of them in our -- what caused this problem, said all those things overseas, ruining our economy. as we are hearing the same things again. too many regulations on banks. people need to wake up. we do not have enough, or the right ones. every time dodd-frank comes up, they are fighting for it, fighting for their big buddies on wall street. i would not trust wall street or big banks as far as i can throw my neighbor. because of this problem is wall street and the big business. it is not as people out here who lost our jobs in the factories. thank you. guest: he raises an interesting point. republicans did fight against
8:06am
dodd-frank. they phrased it as big government, creating another government agency. congressman, like barney frank, would say the banks had messed up, they needed a new regulatory system. still see that tanner in congress as republicans try to chip away at dodd-frank. host: take as back to when dodd- frank was still being formed. we have not hit the four-year anniversary of t.a.r.p., but president bush was still in office when things got started. what led to some of those decisions? guest: there are a lot of misconceptions, but it was a republican president and republican treasury secretary, but it did receive support from the democrats. at the time, they were doing a
8:07am
lot of case by case bailouts of bear stearns, a.i.g., but they did not have the tools -- they argued -- to do a large-scale rescue. the economy was in a scary time. every sunday night we were getting calls from treasury of some other crisis happening. paulson help that what he needed was larger 42 rescue the economy. that is how t.a.r.p. came about. the figure was originally $700 billion, even though they did not spend that amount. it was a scary figure for congress when it first went on the hill. that caused the stock market to tank. one week later, it passed. originally, they wanted to just take the bad assets away from the bank and sell those. that program proved too difficult within a matter of
8:08am
days, just providing direct capital into the banks, which has led to a lot of the controversy. host: a twitter comment coming in. why did banks paid -- if t.a.r.p. was to pay for closure of why did things give bonuses instead of buying troubled assets? guest: when t.a.r.p. was passed, there were not other restrictions. they did not have a lot of home owner programs tied to it. it was a very clean, give money to the banks. paulson argued he had to do it that way for the banks to take the money, but others have argued that it allowed the banks to pay compensation. later, when congress and the other bills looked at
8:09am
compensation and other restrictions, that is what prompted the largest banks to get out. when they did, wall street came back and they make profits, so they were no longer in government hands and were able to pay bonuses. host: especially the small banks that we are talking about, do they want this? guest: i think some of them did. some of the original banks that got the money argue they did not need it, argued they were healthy. however, they are better now because of that. the small banks really tried to get t.a.r.p. what could they do to argue to qualify? they were more in need of the capital. host: republican caller in miami, florida. caller: my husband works for a small bank and i will say that
8:10am
his experience has been exactly the opposite. when the treasury was offering t.a.r.p., his boss went to d.c., with an organization of smaller banks. he came back with a story. there is this thing called t.a.r.p., we do not need it. they want us to take it. he says there would be two lists. those that would be healthy to take it and those who were not. this is exactly how it came down, not how you read about it in the newspapers. a couple of weeks later my husband came home and said that money will cost us 5%. we asked if we could just pay it off but they said that have to keep it for three years. then i remember a couple of weeks later he said, because we took the t.a.r.p., now i'm going to have to have a 5% cut to my
8:11am
salary. this bank was held a, did not need it, did not want it. basically, our family has helped to subsidize the crisis. before you hang up, there are a couple of things that do not get talked about. when you are in on this early, i remember when the cowboys from washington came down. there was a seminar in miami when they were explaining cra. basically, they were saying we want you to lend money to people who cannot afford it. if you are losing a bit of money, you are not do it -- to in your job. this is how they sold it. i would like to say, the people in america, support your local community banks. they did not create this crisis. they are trying to make money available to main street, and of
8:12am
course, they have to be very conservative, but they are the ones that make money accessible. they are also the one that play -- they had to pay a couple of years ago there fdic insurance premiums. most people do not realize how that works. the little banks can overregulated. they had to pay three years worth the premium up front because fdic was running out of money, and they had to go and rob it. they also have to pay the same amount of money to follow the regulations. it cost my husband's bank a quarter million dollars a year to institute all the regulations that the cowboys in d.c. but thy require. host: let's get a response from cheyenne hopkins, however talk about what you are progressing. guest: she mentioned it was sold as a program for healthy banks.
8:13am
that is how paulson sold it. since we have seen some banks that did take chirrupy fail. however, at first, it was a good thing to take t.a.r.p. it was thought that if he did not take it, maybe you were not healthy. that changed once the restrictions were added on. she talked about the common theme of the divide between small and large banks. small banks feel like they are the cause of the larger banks. there is this constant battle that is cheaper for the larger banks, how they pay insurance to the ftse, and even post-dodd- frank, pre crisis, that is an issue. there is a group representing small banks. they have been trying to explain to people that small banks are not the wall street banks, tried
8:14am
to bridge the divide. trying to doll i that. >> our caller talked about how small banks have a lot of regulation they have to deal with. because they are smaller and had to deal with a lot from washington. tell us about when you're pressured were about those comments. guest: small banks are right now try to fight that, as the regulation, bank overhaul law is being implemented. they were promised that a lot of the regulation they would not be given the same treatment. they are arguing they are not seen that. so they are asking for a two tiered system. host: we are talking about banks that still of t.a.r.p. money. there are more than 300 of them
8:15am
go up to $111 billion. here is a message from jim. why do we save small banks? guest: as the last caller said, the small banks are four small communities. i am from a very small town. there was no big bank in that town. it was a small community bank. for some towns, if the small bank fails, a lot of the lending and businesses would not be able to survive. that is a lot of the rationale that small banks would say should be saved, too. host: next phone call. caller: in your current facts and figures, how does it take into account -- in february
8:16am
2009, elizabeth warren had reported they could not locate $78 billion of t.a.r.p. money. she determined it was overpaid. to date, i have never heard what had happened to that. has this money -- money ever been located? thank you, ladies. guest: that was an interesting point. a lot of the corn has been a big critic of t.a.r.p. she did help to create the consumer protection financial bureau, but she was on the oversight board of t.a.r.p. i am not familiar with the report where you say the money was missing. there has been a dispute between some of the watchdogs of t.a.r.p., the calculation of how you account for profit, the amount treasury uses. that debate is still continuing. barry.a question from ve
8:17am
cheyenne hopkins, how quickly did the big banks repay the money? guest: they were able to pay the money back within months. they wanted to take it that quickly. it was almost immediate. after congress through a separate bill with a lot of restrictions. the banks want to get out of that. they argued they were helping in the first place and did not need the money. whether or not that is true, that is unknown. they do have larger access to capital. it is easy for a larger bank to go to the market and raise money than it is for a smaller bank to raise even $150,000.
8:18am
host: cleveland. ronald, good morning. caller: good morning. since capital is a construct and government is a construct, these things are developed within the minds of men. why can we properly prosecute the people that caused the problems? are they sociopathic? and do we suffer from what i would call, perhaps, the willful denial in prosecuting these types? least pythagorean types, they
8:19am
have been with us from the beginning of time. host: give us an idea of who you are talking about so we can respond. bankers, politicians? caller: of course. why can we properly prosecute these bankers? guest: he raises an interesting point. you see every few months an article of why we do not have more prosecution of banks, why there are not more bankers in jail. it is a question the administration has been tough on. this administration has been looking at a lot of the mortgages that were made to see if there was fraud. yes, he is right, there was not allow the prosecution. that anger towards banks
8:20am
continues, and you still see it on the hill, in the elections. host: a tweet. what lessons can we learn from this and how can we prevent t.a.r.p. from happening again? guest: that is a question that congress still struggles with. the democrats, barney frank, would like to say we would like to not have t.a.r.p. again. there was the ability of the government to bail out banks. that ability was taken away by t.a.r.p. lea midwood fail during the crisis. it was a messy bankruptcy. the government did not have the ability to put a large bank in bankruptcy. now they have the authority to put a large bank through resolution authority, which is how they sell small banks. democrats would argue they will
8:21am
now be able to put a large bank through resolution, break it apart, and sell that bank. the republicans do not trust that. they may never trust that until we get to another crisis and another bank gets in trouble and we find how the government deals with that. host: a tweeter asking about the future prospects of t.a.r.p., and another of asking about the money made in the industry. how is the tone different in washington now from a few years ago, given the reaction they have had to how this has played out? guest: it has toned down a little but the anger towards the banks is still there. they have not help themselves by some other recent scandals, just when they are starting to get some of that could buy back, they have a scandal like the london whale, libor.
8:22am
it is better than it was during the crisis, but as long as people are unemployed, losing their homes and under water, they will want to blame the big banks. host: cheyenne hopkins is a treasure reporter for bloomberg. she has also reported for congressional quarterly, covering the congressional finance committee. she is a graduate of the university of oklahoma. frank is an independent caller. caller: a problem with the banking industry and the nation as a whole, we have mr. paulson, mr. greenspan, the late secretary, rubinstein. these people have manipulated the economy of the united states for hundreds of years.
8:23am
ms. hopkins was saying, these banks would repay these loans at a 6% rate. if the american public was allowed to repay their credit card with a 9% rate, this country would have the stimulus they need right now to help things grow. i wasn't the plateau that we are supposed to get to -- we are a consuming nation? this is all the fanfare that we got before this crisis hit. this was manipulated. nobody mentions anything about the derivatives that the big banks have bought for the european fail-safe program. how come nobody has addressed that? why are the big bank holding all those derivatives from europe? if europe fails, the american public picks it up in their tax program. guest: he carries on the team to were the big banks. on the rate of t.a.r.p., it is
8:24am
very low. banks are only paying 5%, on the idea from paulson, with fewer banksctions, getting banks tmoe to participate. he also mentioned europe. treasury secretary tim geithner and the federal reserve chairman ben bernanke have said that we now have a modest exposure to europe. not many banks have fully disclosed with their exposure is, but our direct exposure is likely to be modest. it is more the indirect exposure of how it will trickle to our economy. host: in a recent article, talking about how the more than 300 buildout banks will be unable to pay $10.8 billion in taxpayer funds.
8:25am
take us more through how this is all working, as the administration tries to sell off these stakes in auction process. then how will they do with pulling together the shares? guest: they initially tried to have the banks pay the money back dollar for dollar, but now we are seeing some of the and helping banks which are unable to to that. they have done a couple of options. -- auctions. they have done 12 so far. they do pretty well. not one-for-one but they are
8:26am
still making a profit on these options. their expectation is once they get down to some smaller investments, then they would pool those together you might think of it like securitization pulling together. that probably will not happen until the end of the year. host: how does this affect the banks? guest: this process is not as clear. some of them have received a letter -- they start receiving them last november that the government says there would like to get out of t.a.r.p. some have received a letter that said you are in a pool to be considered in an auction. some banks are being thrown into this process. host: long island, new york. david. caller: thank you for taking my
8:27am
call. i have a couple of questions. i heard you give an answer many calls back about the economy, that it is about stealing, perception. it is not really for me. it is more factual with numbers, how the economy is going. if you are saying the economy is doing good, then you need more teaching. i do not understand. it is not doing good in the need to bail out a business because it decided to give out loans that people could not payback and they go into foreclosure, how you do that is beyond my perception and then you say that the economy is good, we need more money to build more businesses because the economy is good. could you explain the feeling of the economy?
8:28am
guest: economy is still struggling. we are still in high unemployment, still having foreclosures. starting to get better but we are still not there yet. the other point you raised on t.a.r.p., that is officially closed. dodd-frank closed early. the banks in their can get out but the government cannot use t.a.r.p. to lead to any more banks. host: albany, georgia. johnny. caller: every time a speaker comes on your show, they will say the republicans did this, but the democrats have a fair share of blame. that is not true. the republicans started t.a.r.p. the democratic president could not stop it the minute he got in. the republicans started solyndra. the president could not stop it.
8:29am
if the blame goes where the blame goes, it should go to the republicans. they started it. it is still their baby. it will be their baby until it is cooked. host: johnny, stay with us for a moment. how influential are the issues of the bailout and banking to you as you get ready to look at the election? caller: i will be voting straight democratic ticket so that we can keep things on track. things are on track now. if we fall off the bridge now, going to republicans, we will be under water for a long time. guest: he brings up a lot of the common theme of who is to blame for this. republicans and democrats were together on t.a.r.p. it was a republican president,
8:30am
republican treasury secretary, but t.a.r.p. was part supported in congress by democrats. a lot of the republican leaders did not vote for t.a.r.p.. occurred treasury secretary -- the current treasury secretary was at the fed t.a.r.p. is a shared program, in a way. host: a tweet asks, what are the small banks auctioning off? guest: they are auctioning off, to these banks have. after some of these stories, i get e-mails from people asking how they can buy some stakes in these banks. guest: i host: is this something citizens
8:31am
can participate in? guest: yes, of the average citizen can. it is a lot of money, but you can. host: in theory. cheyenne hopkins, thank you for coming on this morning. coming up next, reid wilson of hot line joins us to look at the 2012 senate races. and then we look at a new trend in higher education, offering courses online. first, this news update from c- span radio. >> checking in on the campaign trail, there is a new television ad out today from a super pac supporting president obama. the ad, sponsored by priorities usa action, criticized the governor from the's business decisions at bain capital.
8:32am
it features a former employee who lost his job and health insurance when the capital closed his plan in 2001. the man says he does not think mitt romney "understand what he has done to people's lives." meanwhile, a new mitt romney ad criticizes president obama's position on welfare, and accuses the president of cutting welfare reform. he says he simply wants to pass out checks without the work requirement adopted in president clinton's welfare overhaul. governor romney is on the trail today in illinois, while the president is in washington as work continues on the national mall. word that the reflecting pool in front of the lincoln memorial is about to reopen after a two- year $34 million reconstruction. the pool will be shallow work, the bottom will be tinted, and there will be side box instead of dirt paths.
8:33am
the national park service hopes to reopen the park to the public by the end of the month. >> the political parties are holding their platform hearings in advance of the summer conventions. with democrat voted this week and on their final platform recommendations in detroit. republican start their reform process next month. c-span's complete coverage of the party convention begins monday august 27 with coverage of the national republican convention in tampa and the democratic national convention from charlotte, north carolina. host: reid wilson is editor and chief of hot line. welcome. guest: good morning. host: the senate races are heating up into 2012. the big ones you are watching? guest: today is the chance for
8:34am
voters in missouri to vote for someone to square off with clear mccaskill. she is the most vulnerable democrats seeking reelection this year. any of the three major challenges running against her right now would give her a very tough race in the fall. some would say she is the underdog against all three. recent survey put her behind all three candidates by between five and 11 points. host: we see "the washington times." take us through the competitors in the republican primary. what will this mean for senator mccaskill? john berner -- brunner has been perceived as the front-runner for quite awhile. that gave him an early name
8:35am
recognition lead, which translated into a lead in most surveys of the republican primary. todd akin, who has been the most underfunded, is running far to the bright, seems to be capturing the attention of the conservative world right now. we are getting a hint that he could be surging late and may even take advantage into the primary. the third candidate is former treasurer sarah steelman, who is running from an area where a lot of the republican base is. i think there are some in washington who would like to see her when the nomination because ishe is such a contrast from mccaskill. mccaskill released three sets of advertisements going after each candidate pier one offered a series of attacks against
8:36am
brunner the businessman, another offered a reasonably harsh attack against steelman, and the one against akin seemed somewhat positive. it looks like she is planning an interesting game, trying to pick her own rival. it is a smart thing to do. it looks like that akin advertisement ran most heavily in missouri. even though he has not have the money to offer his own advertising, mccaskill has done it a little bit for him, which is a clever political move. host: "the washington times" saying what you are saying. an easy challenge in her
8:37am
campaign the opinion because he is for the to the right? guest: he is the least well funded, the least well known, has a voting record that mccaskill can run against. this is a candidate and others have pursued in the past. think back to gov. gray davis. you to the unpopular running for reelection in california. he ran a bunch of advertising in the republican primary last thing reared in as not conservative enough. the other candidate winning the project -- it ended up winning the primary and davis ended up pulling off one of the bigger upsets of the decade in 2002. harry reid in 2010, did the same thing. this is a tried and true tactic. it can backfire a bit when it looks too overt, but i think mccaskill did it cleverly by couching it as a negative attack.
8:38am
host: august is usually a sleepy month in politics. you mention the primary in missouri. why is this year so intensive? guest: because of the help of america vote act. these election reforms have forced the election officials to provide balance to military voters farther out before the election to make sure they all have the chance to vote. that means the primary campaigns have to be completed and parties have to know who their candidates will be by the time to time rolls around, which means any state and wanted to hold their primary in september would be in violation of that law, so they have to hold an earlier. now for the first time we are starting to see these big senate primaries in the month of august, a time when people are usually to no politics. it will be interesting to watch just to turns out in these races.
8:39am
it will provide future modeling ability for any consultant looking to run a race in those states in a future august primary. host: if you want to talk to reid wilson about the 2012 campaign, here are the numbers. let us turn our attention to wisconsin. august 14. what are you watching? guest: 1 week from now, of the race to replace herb kohl gets under way. right now it looks like it is a mirror in missouri a bit. the wealthy businessman has spent millions in reducing himself to voters. that has given him a chance to rival someone who should be the top tier candidate, former gov. tommy thompson. he was hugely popular.
8:40am
democrats and independents remember voting for him in the late a.d.'s and 90's. but he has not faced a voter since 1998. he thought about running for governor in 2006, senate in 2010. he ended of delaying his decision and then ended up not running. a lot of the conservatives in the state have questions about his record in terms of spending. this is before the tea party movement sort of took over the republican party. now what we are seeing is tommy thompson has a pretty hard feeling. he probably has about 40% of the vote. that means the two other candidates have the opportunity to break in and score something higher than thompson. at the moment, what we see is a two-person race probably between hovde and thompson, although its
8:41am
third candidate is showing some life. it is not clear that newman is surging to the extent that others did, but there is a real chance we could have a three-way race. then again, if the anti-tommy thompson both ends of splintered to much, we could see him as the nominee. i think he is the strongest candidate that would appeal to democrats, although some would criticize his time in the bush administration, if it comes down to the election. we will see a clash of two very different candidates in the election, no matter who wins on the republican side. the democrat waiting for them is tammy baldwin, from madison, wisconsin's version of san
8:42am
francisco. she is somebody who has moved to the center with some of her the advertisements, but i think she will face an equally tough time statewide. this is a race where we will have one candidate who is too liberal for the state and one who is too conservative, and the voters will have to pick a lesser of two evils. host: an article yesterday looked at the race. host: track this moment that you and others are observing of candidates trying to position themselves as the one who is really outside the beltway, outside the foundations of
8:43am
government and industry. there has been a lot of back-and-forth about candidates passed. neumann ran in the gubernatorial race against scott walker. the interesting thing about outsider versus insider, this is the biggest problem the republican elected officials are facing right now. it is not their record that voters do not like, it is not their personal appeal. it is the fact that they are incumbent officeholders. therefore, they are members of the establishment. we saw that in texas when the lieutenant governor lost. he had support from everybody in the establishment, including the third and fourth finishers in the initial round of the primary. all logic dictated that he should be able to win the
8:44am
primary, but cruz, an outside candidate, was able to overcome the establishment and win by a 14-point margin. right now, it is much better to be the outsider, even if the insider has more money, more endorsements. none of that matters to the average primary voter. they want to see the candidate who will shake things up. host: independent caller from baltimore, maryland. caller: i wanted to make a couple of comments and ask a question. the thing that i find about the republicans and democrats is the voters do not ask any questions. if you are going to cut spending -- republican need to be specific. that is where we make our mistakes and that is why we are disappointed in congress. i am an independent, but when
8:45am
the republicans voted these people in, they voted them in for specific reasons, but they did not ask questions about what specifically would you do, what are you going to cut? nobody is specific. that is the problem. that is why we keep on voting in people who do not do the job because we do not ask questions. we are going to cut spending, we're going to do this, cut what? they never say. guest: i think there are some examples of times where candidates have offered something to cut. paul ryan's budget is a good example. he offers a pretty comprehensive road map. with the support that or not, it is specific. that being said, there is this missing policy debate, especially in the presidential contest right now, where we see these statements about what neither side would do if
8:46am
elected. that is something that we will see coming up at the conventions. august is a time when not a lot of people are paying attention. still 90 days to go until election day. at both convention we will see both governor romney and president obama talking about what would be covered in their terms, if elected. host: wayne is a republican caller. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. first of all, i think, should get behind hovde. he has been a great governor, nothing against the guy. neumann has always come across as only a professional candidate. hovde, if you watch him in the interviews and all that, he can go to washington and have two terms and get out of there
8:47am
before washington owns them. you are going to start believing you are god. there is no way around that. tammy baldwin, she should not see a vote. in terms of the health care law and how it would it affect my family -- i got one form letter back from her early on. probably late 2009, early 2010, one form letter. that was it. otherwise, the three other times i contacted her, absolutely nothing. hovde is the guy, i think you wisconsin would do well to send him out to washington. guest: these are interesting comment about how you think tommy thompson should back up hovde.
8:48am
conservative activists see tommy thompson as a gold watch as he retires. they are sort of contempt -- content to see that. a lot of voters remember his tenure positively, however, that does not mean that they want to go back to that particular time. hovde is interesting. two years ago, wisconsin voted out fine gold in favor for johnson. if hovde ends up winning the primary, johnson will be the model for how to approach this year's election. then again, wisconsin and general electric will be much different this year than was in 2010. a lot more people turn out in milwaukee, democratic voters and the get-out-the-vote effort really ramp up. it will be a close race. i do not think democrats or republicans think it will be more than a two-point contest.
8:49am
host: our guest, reid wilson, writes this -- guest: in this time in which voters in both parties are trying to find every single voter they can possibly find, wisconsin served as a model for both sides. they have had so long to organize, they have had so much money, they know pretty much where all their votes coming from. they just need to make sure those voters get to the polls on election day. host: another democratic caller. mary. caller: the republicans are really confusing me. on the one hand, there are no jobs and the economy is really bad, and the republicans can fix it, but on the other hand, they
8:50am
want to cut off any kind of assistance for people because they are too lazy to work. it seems to me, republicans want to run with the fox and run with the hounds. they are confusing me. guest: an interesting point she wants to bring up. there are a number of republican governors who are right now at odds with mitt romney's presidential campaign because they will have to run for the re-election themselves, so they have to talk about the positive things happening in their states. governor rick scott in florida has been championing his state, making a comeback economically, and implement wise, and in the housing market, and the romney campaign is not terribly thrilled with that. they want to convince voters that president obama is at fault for the lousy economy in florida. it will be an interesting tension. you see the same thing in virginia were bob mcdonnell is
8:51am
a brown the surrogate. wisconsin, scott walker has been the focus of the state's politics for the last two years, because of this gubernatorial recall. >> other key gop primaries. another call from wisconsin on the line right now from milwaukee. martin, republican. caller: good morning and walt -- thank you for c-span. as a republican, of course, i want to see more republicans in the united states senate. currently, we are at an impasse. i will vote for tommy thompson in the primary because i think he has the best chance to be tammy baldwin, who has an ultra liberal voting record. as a republican, we do not need any more ultras in the senate. guest: tommy thompson, a guy that has a good reputation with
8:52am
republican voters, and democrat and independent voters remember voted for. however, the electorate has changed dramatically in the last decade or so. i think we have seen that, going all the way back to 2006, in a number of different states, established inverses revolution, in which the outsider got the upper hand. 2006, alaska, some on non mayor of a small town named sarah palin beat out the incumbent governor and other state senator by a pretty significant margin. that was the first outsider election. now this wisconsin race has the potential to be the latest. host: you brought up sarah palin. what role is she playing in this race? she ended up endorsing republican candidate. guest: she is backing sarah
8:53am
steelman in the primary. we are hearing sttelman they finished third, which would pick.palin's first bad earlier this year in the nebraska senate primary, sarah palin and joyce a state senator named deb fischer who ended up winning. both of her candidates were farther to the right. fisher is the incoming chair of the state senate transportation committee, which is not a committee known for being shy on spending for infrastructure. palin picture spots smartly. however, today, when the polls close in missouri, steelman
8:54am
maybe the one blemish in her otherwise spotless record. host: joe is our next caller. good morning. caller: i just wanted to tell mr. wilson, the democrats are going to win all of their senate seats this year. i will tell you why. i am looking at va. va., to me, the only thing that the democrat has to do is just put a mcconnell commercial out. mr. kaine does not have to do anything. all they have to do is bring back the makaka commercial. and in terms of the list that mr. romney could pick 4 vp, i
8:55am
think he will pick rick santorum. i do not see him on the list at all, but what i will tell you today -- i have my reason why. maybe when i call today, i will tell you the reason why i believe he will choose rick santorum. host: reid wilson, let's begin with the virginia race. guest: i think the kaine party is a bit more pessimistic than you are. will be to and nail. you have the former governor tim kane, a former senator and governor george allen, who lost this seat to jim webb. it will be fascinating to watch because these are two titans who are able to raise a lot of money, both with big-time name recognition. this is all about turnout and mobilizing the voters.
8:56am
every possible voter that you can find. tim kaine hass strength in the suburbs, in richmond. he was governor there. and then he has strength in the growing african-american communities, southeast virginia. george allen's stronghold are pretty much everywhere else. he will need voted to turn down in southwest virginia, which did not really turn out heavily last time. culturally conservative democrats who are starting to vote republican. he needs to turn those voters out. joe might be confident, but there are a lot of races in which the democratic candidate may fall short. you tell me who wins virginia, i will tell you who controls the senate next year. host: controls the senate? say more. guest: he brings up the point that democrats will win everything. there are 23 democratic seats up
8:57am
this year, 10 republican seats. most of the seats will stay on their sides, but there are some democratic held seats that will go republican. i mentioned missouri earlier. fisher looks like she is leading at the moment. mccaskill faces some tough times in missouri. john tester in montana faces a difficult race against republican, who is well known throughout the state, eddie statewide elected official. nebraska, kent conrad is retiring. that is the most surprised race of the year so far. former state attorney candidate is doing pretty well. that is all about her ability to distance herself from president obama, who will lose the state's electoral votes. she just needs to win that
8:58am
crossover appeal. what we see throughout the country is, in most states, democrats are running a few points ahead of president obama. clare mccaskill will do better than him in missouri. kaine will be a few points ahead of obama in virginia. all because they have this reputation of reaching out more than they are not the polarizing figure who is not at the top of the ticket. it is all about crossover voting. just watch how much the democratic candidates are able to outpace the republican opponents. then again, crossover voting used to be a completely normal thing, and some democrats would outpace their presidential nominees by 10, 20 points. those days are dwindling because people are viewing the national parties as more influential than the actual names on the ballots themselves. my colleague likes to say, in this case, the colors of the jersey matter more than the names on the back. host: reid wilson is the editor
8:59am
in chief at hot line. a staff writer also at "the hill." he also cover the 2008 election cycle. he did polling in the 276 election. he has also reported for "the new republic," and " the national journal." one of our callers brought the vice-presidential race, to see who mitt romney would choose. according to "the washington post" the list gets shorter perio-- we see some of these people, including mike huckabee, condoleezza rice, nikki caylee, susanna martinez. take us through how significant that is.
9:00am
are we still see members of congress on the short list? guest: i hate to it was announced that rick santorum would be a speaker. there would give away a little bit of the buzz there would be able to build. jeb bush, rand paul, rick santorum gives us a little more hint of where the short list is going. there a few incumbent members of congress on the short list. marco rubio is a name that has been talked about a lot.
9:01am
i don't think they will pick him. rubio does not have a lot of experience on the national level. he threatens to overshadow mitt romney. that is the positive that ends up dooming him. host: t.j. tweets in. mary from tennessee, hi. caller: i like marco rubio but i hope they leave him in the senate. they have not presented a budget because they are too cowardly to say what they are for. gossip on the house and the senate. you're talking about the governors.
9:02am
20,000 a month that obama is putting on disability that would go to medicaid. they will be having to foot the bill for this. we need to get romney in there and to repeal obamacare. all these people are getting on disability just to get a handout. they do not want to work. host: mary is a republican and thinks it is important that republicans take it back. we have a tweet from gary. guest: this is gone to be the challenge. i think there are eight open seats. you have virginia, connecticut, new mexico is an
9:03am
open seat. there are a lot incumbents that are vulnerable. you cannot get scott brown in massachusetts. he is in some measure of trouble as he faces elizabeth warren because of the crossover voting. president obama will get about 60% of the vote in massachusetts. that means scott brown will have to win one and of every six obama voters. he is appealing to the conservative democrats that the needs in places like western massachusetts who might vote for a republican candidate. he will need everyone to pull that off. i love watching nevada.
9:04am
you have a great contrasts. on ise a rancher who takes his horses out. democrat is from las vegas and cannot be any more from las vegas. her father worked at the sands. great contrast between two candidates. there is an ethics investigation that is not helping her case. republicans are smart in highlighting that as much as they can. neither side believes this race will be more than a two-point race either way. the other republican seat that is likely to go to a new candidate is the open seat in the maine where olympia snowe is
9:05am
retiring. a candidate will try to stay away from either caucus. democrats think they will caucus with them. he showed up at a obama fund- raiser last year. that is another wrinkle into this contest. democrats are not terribly safe but they have some opportunities around the country. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i think the fact that most elderly americans are not yet aware that the ryan budget will put an end to medicare.
9:06am
once they learn that, there will be a a large number of elderly americans nationwide that will vote for democrats both in the house and in the senate. i live in texas and in the congressional district that i live in, we have a republican congressman and no democrat can that. statewide, we now have a democrat candidate or senate -- for senate. republican is a texan that has proclaimed to be the winner. we will see about that. guest: he is talking about the democratic nominee in texas, paul sadler.
9:07am
taxes should be a purple state because of the demographics of the state. so many hispanic americans have not registered to vote. it the most for thinking republican consultants looking tanned and 20 years down the road believe that taxes will eventually be in the top column, but will be awhile before that takes place. cruz is the overwhelming favorite to win. that tells you pretty much what you need to know about that race. fred krupp and adjusting point about the ryan budget -- fred brought up an interesting point
9:08am
about the ryan budget. the democrats believe they can use this as a way to hammer republicans and i think we will see that as a cornerstone for a lot of campaigns this year. paul ryan is a member of congress from one district in wisconsin. it is not clear a lot of people know what the ryan budget is and it takes in a lot of work to explain that to voters. democrats believe they can win that argument. host: recent headline in "the washington times." guest: let's go back to what mary said about that. she wants to keep rubio in the senate. ted cruz is part of that
9:09am
dynamic. people like senator jim demint, michael lee, rand paul from kentucky, all of whom want it their way and the most conservative way possible and may pose some problems for mitch mcconnell. if republicans take over the senate in a couple of years, i think you'll see mitch mcconnell facing some problems in have to deal with this conference that's not necessarily willing to go along with everything on the republican agenda. they will want something more conservative. host: john from georgia, welcome. caller: i believe that the
9:10am
president will do very well in the general election. if mitt romney chooses to pick either rob portman or marco rubio, i think he will try to defend florida and ohio. if he chooses ryan out of wisconsin, he believes he does not have to defend those states in for will be a shoe an- the presidency. guest: we have a number of states where presidential battlegrounds overlap with senate battlegrounds. all these key states that both sides need to win. one of the interesting subterranean factors is that there are only a limited number
9:11am
of television advertisements that you can buy. television advertisements of the lifeblood of any campaign. you have the organizations, the senate candidates and their trying to advertise, you'll run out of space. if you live like anyplace like cleveland or las vegas or tampa , you cannot get away from them . i suggest some might invest in eight d v aa dvr. john talked about whether or not picking marco rubio or rob portman would help a presidential campaign carried a state. chris christie said it best when
9:12am
it's said people don't vote for a vice president. it is unlikely to anybody has won a state because of their vice presidential pick. john kennedy picked lyndon johnson and end up winning texas. host: this is a headline from " the arizona daily star." guest: here we go again. you have jeff blake who is the insiders outsider in washington, d.c. -- jeff flake. he was tea party before tea party was cool.
9:13am
all these earmarked legislation he has proposed has angered his own party here in d.c. some people will be happy that he will be gone next time around but they might have to deal of them in the u.s. senate . not one said the other party is the opposition. you have jeff flake running against a businessman named wil cardon. cardon has risen may political unknown to be competitive with flake. flake has the establishment behind him. we just saw a clip this morning about cardon going dark a little
9:14am
bit just when arizona's voters are getting their absentee ballots. that is not a good thing. that tells me he is either supremely confident about his chances in the primary or he is on confidence and worried about his prospects -- or he is unconfident. this is the outsiders coming to the aid of the insiders or however you want to characterize jeff flake. has everybody -- he has everybody. host: we should mention the connecticut race. give us one thing to watch for. guest: just how much linda
9:15am
mcmahon is able to beat chris shays. mcmahon needs to branch out, it was something she did not do too successfully in her 2010. she will face a real challenge. host: we will be watching that next week. reid wilson, editor in chief of "hotline," thank you so much. up next, kevin carey from the new america foundation. but first, a news update from c- span radio. >> united nations officials say more than 220,000 iraqis have returned home after the past three weeks to escape syria's
9:16am
civil war. international donors are urged to contribute more to provide for the new arrivals. let the refugees travel on from the border. the head of the u.s. import and export bank is offering south africa a $2 billion loan. the deal will be signed today with south african officials. the loans could benefit companies like general electric. the loan comes during a by hillary clinton. the government rescued freddie mac and fannie mae in september of 2008 after suffering massive losses on risky mortgages. freddie mac requested $19
9:17am
million and received $7.6 billion for all of 2011. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] >> tonight, we'll take you inside the campaign process. >> if i am advising mitt -- he is not going to win because of excitement. sarah palin brought excitement to john mccain. chris christie would bring excitement to mitt romney. >> discussion with the dean and obama's campaigns. >> the barack obama campaign is
9:18am
generated 200 million pieces of information on the electorate. that is now housed in the voter data base and becomes the foundation with which they can go back and coordinate the outreach program. >> two different perspectives on campaigns past and present, all starting tonight. >> "washington journal" continues. host: kevin carey is the education policy program director with the new america foundation. what is the difference in trying to get a degree and what are called mooc's? tell us what the word means. guest: it stands for massive open online courses. it is a new phenomenon.
9:19am
online courses are quite prevalent in higher education. 37% of all college students will take at least one online class. the have been primarily offer by traditional institutions. you pay tuition and get credits and you get eventually a degree. credit andnot for not being offered under traditional academic programs. they are very large courses that have been developed by some of the world's most famous universities. they are free of charge. they are being taught and designed by some of the best professors at these universities. they started at stanford last year. the most famous one started at stanford last year or a couple
9:20am
of professors opened up their classes to anybody that wanted to take them and they had hundreds of thousands of students signed up for these courses. host: what were the courses/ guest: the first work in artificial intelligence. pretty advanced stuff. i think they attracted attention because they were being taught in stafford. one man who started this is the head of the self-driving a car initiative at google. he is world famous and people were interested in him and that it was a stanford class. it got some publicity in the newspaper and a kind of took off and went viral. "the here's a story from
9:21am
atlantic" looking at these stanford classes. 60% of those students seem to be curious and did not continue at the class. 20,000 did a substantial amount of work. guest: right. these are tough classes. not like anybody can log on and do this. they are trying to keep the academic sense high. they have strong off their own company. they have course is from penn,
9:22am
the university of virginia, a bunch of top-flight research universities that are participating in the initiative and some other startup companies doing the same thing. host: some more information about these massive open online courses. coursera is one company. there is also edx. guest: each one seems to be taking a different approach. edx is designing the courses themselves and putting it out there. mit has been a leader in getting classes online for free for people. coursera is designed more as a platform where people from universities can offer selective
9:23am
coursers. udacity was started by a professor from stanford and it is a stand-alone company and not offering "stanford classes." host: we are talking with kevin carey about massive open online courses. if you would like to join the conversation, republicans can call 202-737-0002. democrats, 202-737-0001. callersr, 202-628- 0205. guest: i was talking to a professor that is teaching one of these clauses in the spring. nor will he will teach 30 or 40 people in a class at penn.
9:24am
40,000 people have signed up for his class. this skill was never possible before. -- this scale was never possible before. for the university, they are not charging. what is the business model? these are very wealthy universities and they have resources to spend on this kind of thing. they have a mission to provide knowledge to the world, so this is a way to fulfill that mission. it is a way to reach some of the best students in the world. hundreds of thousands of people signed up only 10,000 people managed to pass the class. that is a very bright 10,000 people.
9:25am
universities aspire to be global institutions. host: is there a conversation about diminishing the brand of some of the schools? how hard it is to get into a schoolwide mit or stanford. guest: they are not going to be giving stanford degrees or mit to greece. degrees. this signifies your smart enough to get into mit and you spent four or more years in a very intensive learning environment, one on access to some of the smartest people in the world. nobody is purporting that these mooc's are going to replace that.
9:26am
they may be competing with less prestigious universities. host: let's talk to a co-founder of coursera. this is daphne koller. why start the company? guest: we started this in 2011 after we had three large stamford classes that have enrollment of 100,000 students each. we realize we need to take it to the next level. if we were going to do that, other institutions have amazing courses to offer the world. we wanted to let more people participate. host: give us a sense of those institutions. guest: we started with michigan., penn, and ag
9:27am
then we announced an additional 12 in april including toronto. there seems to be a pivotal moment in higher education when it is no longer a case for an institution of whether to engage in this online education in rather how and how quickly they can get into doing something in this new space. host: what kinds of classes are offered? guest: previous efforts focused on computer science and some math. we offer courses across the disciplines of humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, across the entire spectrum. host: always talking about
9:28am
mostly american students? how educated are they going into your classes? guest: it is very much a moving target. the composition of the population changes. the international students come from all over the world, over 190 different countries. our biggest countries are brazil, russia, and the u.k. and canada. chine is about number 10 because of connectivity issues. they come from all over the map. we had a barbecue or had a 10- year-old who was taking classes. and his grandmother was taking classes.
9:29am
people who already have a degree and sometimes an advanced degree and want to get a better job or change the kinds of skills that they have to offer. host: is everything free for the students? it?you get out of b guest: we have not charged for any thing. we want this to be a sustainable effort. we need to bring in some revenue. we do not intend to charge student for content. we fill the kid in africa that doesn't have a credit card should be able to make his or her life better. we are trying to come up with revenue models that do not
9:30am
involve charging for access. one of the ideas we have been tossing around is charging for certification so if a student wants the certificate so they can get a better job, that is available to them for a modest amount we think because the economy and skill we have in terms of the large number of students, we can make that eight sustainable business model. the other model is the recruiting model where we would work with employers who are trying to close a skills gap. even though there is significant unemployment, there is still large timbers of jobs that are going unfilled because employers are having a hard time identifying skilled employees. introductions between employers and places that might help fill those gaps. host: daphne koller, co-founder
9:31am
of coursera. a question on twitter from maverick. how does it play out? guest: it is more interactive than you might think. the first generation of online courses or basically taping a lecture. people do not like to sit and watch somebody drone on for 90 minutes. these new classes are designed from the ground up. there are short video clips and then you go to the student. you take a quiz as a way of checking yourself to make sure you've done the points that have cross.rought a c
9:32am
discussion forums that some of the mooc providers have created for students. you never will have the one-on- one interaction with a professor when there are 100,000 students and the professor is on the other side of the world. there are other opportunities to interact with other students online. host: we are talking about mooc's, massive open online courses. caller: this is larry. i think this is a marvelous idea. i've thought that colleges should get together and make it so you can get degrees. somebody that does this i think
9:33am
is every bit as qualified as somebody who goes to a four- year college. anyone who does this has got the fortitude and many people are smart enough to go to mit. they just cannot get into mit. why be so exclusive? open this up. i think the government should think about this when they subsidize these other schools through student loans. this could make education much cheaper and i think people but go through this are every bit as educated. host: the question of getting a degree. we have a tweet from ronald.
9:34am
break down the difference between a degree program and moocs. guest: mooc's are free. i think mary make some good points. the offer the original class at stanford and their offering the same class to stanford undergraduates and all these people around the world. the average student from the original 200,000, probably not as good a student in the stanford 400. among the top 5000 students, they did just as well as the stanford students, even though many of them were not from the united states and many were returning students'. there are a lot of bright people in the world. if someone can self-direct and
9:35am
go through one of these courses , why would not give them credit bill would give credit to somebody from the university of phoenix online? host: donna from michigan, democratic caller. caller: i like to thank the new america foundation for everything they are doing. this is the most under reported story ever and i encourage everybody to get it on facebook and twitter. host: have you taken any of this classes? caller: no, i haven't, but my daughter and granddaughter are interested in taking them. host: don has a different perspective on twitter.
9:36am
guest: that is a good point. student debt is at an all-time high in this country right now. more and more people are interested in the cost of higher education. the cost of college as more than tripled after inflation since the 1980's. we cannot have students starting their lives with $10,000, 0,000 in debt.0 i now we have these online courses that have been branded by the world's best universes' that are free -- nothing like a freight to compete with $30,000 -- nothing like free to compete
9:37am
with $30,000. host: harvey from new jersey. caller: good morning. i am a retired professor, and i could never hang my head on online education. in my view, to take a massive rip-off by the universities. a higher education is something quite different. are you looking to have a vocational school? are you creating the old fashioned diploma mills? the online education allows universities now to quadruple -- it is a marketing tool.
9:38am
it is a wonderful idea to get a diploma online. but the question is, what is happening to the standards of our certifications? large university in new york's has increase the cumulative averages of their graduating law students so they could get a better job because the grades look better on their resume. host: is there anyway you could see this working to your satisfaction? caller: a lot of people are missing the point. the benefits of interacting on campus is something quite unique.
9:39am
guest: i think harvey make some good points. well be ripping off student. these mooc's are not charging any thing. nobody is saying and online class will replace going to school in a residential environment. i don't think we're headed for a college-less future. i have a daughter and i think i want to send her to a traditional college. i want her to be able to learn in these new online environments as well. the question is, is it good and is a good for the price? when the price is zero, that is
9:40am
a pretty attractive proposition. caller: i question the gentleman -- the new america foundation. we are giving away our intellectual property that was gained in the colleges. i have three students that have to take college sloans out. their opening them up to the world. it would be a tragedy if some kid in india, that he doesn't get a chance. how about giving the americans a chance? it is like they are giving away -- almost like when a steel the intellectual property from our
9:41am
companies. we are worried about the world and providing cheap labor for the corporations. i took a course from the health and human services department to help on records. i cannot get a job after taking this because i did not have the experience or the specific cert. we have so many people unemployed and the corporations are complaining about skills gap. why are they worried about students in other countries instead of us? guest: american universities have always served foreign students. our institutions have attracted smart people from all over the world and i've got a great
9:42am
education and some have stayed here and some have gone back to their countries. overall i think that is a good thing. i do not think we can close our borders when it comes to education. some universities are going to create great online courses that people all over the world will want to take. i think it is a great way for us to spread our values and to reach people around the world. if somebody in china or india or anybody else interacts with other students, i think that is a good thing that america should do. host: kevin carey is the director of the education policy program at the new american foundation. he edits the college and died. diana asked about the new america foundation.
9:43am
guest: it is a nonprofit think tank located here in washington, d.c. we work on education, foreign policy, open technology, healthcare, a whole range of thing. host: so you're not an advocate for the mooc's. guest: we are observers. host: we have a tweet from james. will kind bandwidth is required when you look at rural america to start with and the infrastructure for internet connectivity. guest: you do need some kind of broadband connections on some of these classes. these things are kicking off now. 10 years ago, people were
9:44am
saying the internet would transform education. that is not to say that everybody has access to the band with that they need -- to the bandwidth that they need. we want to make sure there's not a digital divide. host: victoria agrees with you. william from new york, new york. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. this is not a new idea. --the late 1960's this is really a great thing for people that are not able to get to traditional college or they can matriculate.
9:45am
guym a bootstrap d i went to college while i worked. i would have taken that route if it was available. if you're a young person or in your early 20's, if you can get something foree, it is a benefit. you can advance yourself. host: what about the programs that are not yet accredited? seminars or lectures were you just simply learn. caller: that is fine. anything you can get to increase your capacity, that is a wonderful thing and that is how people should look at this.
9:46am
a couple of online law schools in california. the traditional law school committee does not endorse that at all. hopefully as this comes about and people get involved, i'm a i will write myble ri congressman. the whole experience is going to change traditional college. why kept an hour early when you can be in a comfortable environment? social networking is taken the place of people going out. hopefully we are growing. people may not have the funds and they should jump on this.
9:47am
guest: i think he makes a great point. the traditional college student, whether they live in a dorm and go to football games, those students are in the minority. particularly in a difficult job market where we continue to have high unemployment. we have a lot of people that need to go back to advance their skills and their credentials. but they need to keep working. for them, high-quality online classes can be a great option. the question for them is how do they afford it? the idea would need to take these good class is offered by some of the best universities and give people an opportunity to get credit for them,
9:48am
absolutely. write congressman. el as us.nu -- joins us. caller: i was just curious. i want to speak to the topic of a test security. if he thought about a limit on what you can do? can you teach online science? can you do a laboratory? you talk about online. i understand the technology is there and the needs to deliver programs and services to people who may not come to a traditional setting. but his thoughts on security and limitations. guest: security is a big issue.
9:49am
-- s not like these mooc's we have had online classes being offered by traditional universes' for a number of years. udacity, you take the course online. to get a certificate, you have to go to a physical testing site that is run by the big textbook company. you take the class under secure conditions there. there are online companies where you can take the test at home but you have a video camera set up next year computer. they lock your computer so you cannot go on line while you're taken the class. somebody can watch the video of you to make sure you are
9:50am
protecting the class. the online classes are probably better for certain kinds of education. but we are learning. some of the coursera classes are science classes. have developed simulations that can do quite a bit of the work that students can do any laboratory. whether it would help enough for people to be certified, those are questions we need to answer. there should be a level playing field. they should be objective questions about how much people learned. we should not be biased one way or another. host: how much dispute or debate has been within universities as they consider offering these free online courses?
9:51am
there is a story that talks about schools partnering with coursera. there seems to be some debate over at uva. guest: the board of the university fired and rehired their president a few months ago. somewhat of a fiasco. the board members were concerned about this new trend of elite universities signing onto online education. they were concerned that uva might be left behind. we're no longer at a place where universe it can decide whether to do this and it is causing anxiety inside institutions and will probably disrupt traditional
9:52am
arrangements and comfortable ways of doing business. those traditional arrangements are turning out to be increasingly unaffordable for a lot of people. host: we have a tweet from herb. let's look at a couple more. host: water some other big ones that might be outside of the coursera partnership? >> we have a partnership which is the other new organization that is being endorsed by elite universities. the third one that comes up is udacity. it doesn't have formal
9:53am
partnerships but it is run by bright people that have that high level pedigree. it is all happening quickly. the time line has been over the last six or nine months. some of these universities have just signed on in the past two or three weeks. host: ernie from illinois, republican caller. caller: i am a high school teacher getting ready to retire. i've seen a lot of correspondence courses in the military. i became a teacher and went on to get my master's. i was somewhat negative about online courses. i have daughters and people i've worked with have done them.
9:54am
i have seen some quality ones and others from the profit universities. what they do does not compare to what i would do on campus or off site courses or internships. i am a little bit negative. i like the idea of the mooc's. there are certain things of being a teacher of pre- gineering were easy to be on were beingn turniterning more involved. the have had pretty good videos online and they have different chat rooms where they exchanged ideas. i still think campus is the best
9:55am
way to go. for numerous people, this is a great opportunity to get into higher education and feel better about it as long as they keep high standards. some of the online courses have watered down degrees where i don't feel they are the decree i got 20 years ago. guest: this whole idea of quality is crucial. there is no doubt that as online higher education has some institutions have made a lot of money by putting out mediocre courses and profiting on the difference. what i hope is that these new courses, which i think will be very high quality because the brand name of institutions with a reputation to uphold is behind
9:56am
them, will start to put pressure on these low-quality classes. we had eight wild west situation. nobody was checking to make sure the classes were very good. i think we're moving past that now. we need to keep an eye on that. host: this is a recent blog post written by our guest. "it became the latest committing to offer so-called massive open online courses, or mooc's. stanford and mit kicked off the phenomenon just last fall." a tweet from oversight. bill from a minneapolis.
9:57am
caller: good morning. a question came up about labs for science courses. i have a higher education background in physics and computing. this idea of using computer simulations as a replacement for laboratories is questionable. the idea you want to get across is that science is about the real world and you could have theories and implement theories, but it is touching the instruments and coming to internalize that there is a human mind and dealing with human credit instruments that are interacting with the world and the world will act not the way your theories will predict they will necessarily. you have to understand when you
9:58am
get those results have to interpret them in terms of theory and the fact of the with the real world works. thank you. guest: questions of what kinds of specifics educational environments online education is good for and where you need to be in person with that tactile sense, these are the questions that we are trying to resolve. i think we're headed toward a future where for most tombs, it is not as if there will learn in person or learn online. i think it will be a hybrid of learning environment for most dunes in the future. that might mean you take some of your classes online. when it comes to a laboratory, you have to go to a place and interact with people in person because that is what is needed.
9:59am
these are the kinds of questions which to be trying to resolve. for: what we'll be watching in the next step of the process? guest: we will see other institutions get involved with some kind of mooc environment. if that's what it takes with universities to expand access to higher education at low-cost, that's great. the big question of, can you get credit for it, there'll be a lot of pressure on that. host: kevin carey, education policy program director from new america foundation. thank you so much. that is all for "washington journal." we will go to the house f